NEWSLETTER January 2021 – N°8

| EDITORIAL p. 2 | NEWS p. 3 | CASE STUDIES Max Pechstein “Nus dans un paysage” p. 8 Göttweig Abbey: a case study p. 9 | REPORTS 2019 CIVS Activity Report p. 11 Personalia: Janine Drai p. 12 JUST Act – Justice for Uncompensated Survivors Today p. 12 Forfeiture of assets – Austrian post-war justice and restitution as illustrated by the watchmaker Bartholomäus Schmid p. 13 From the “Washington Principles” to the “Handreichung” p. 14 20th anniversary of the Arbeitskreis Provenienzforschung e.V. p. 16 | FIELD REPORT The office of the Commission for Provenance Research seen from the outsidep. 18 | ADDENDUM JDCRP p. I January 2021 – N°8 EDITORIAL

The Network of European Restitution Committees on all, for the regular exchange of information and ideas, Nazi-Looted Art is now two years old, and Austria is which have been summed up in our Newsletters. The idea handing over the presidency to the Netherlands. As of looking at the activities of the other signatories to the mentioned several times in the previous Newsletters Washington Principles was also taken up and we look 6/2020 and 7/2020, the Network’s year in 2020 was forward to developing this exchange of experiences in the dominated by the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly with future. regard to the planned public and internal conferences and the hoped-for intensified exchange of ideas and- ex It remains to be seen how far the difficult global periences. Last year was marked by a series of postpone- situation will continue in 2021 and whether it will affect ments and then cancellations of all activities and events the Network’s activities as massively as it did in 2020. where people could get together. As a result, the Austrian presidency had to end with a list of what might have The year also ended spectacularly for the Network with been. In spite of this, contacts between the various com- the report “Striving for Justice” on the work of the Dutch mittees were stepped up, as proposed last year by former Restitutiecommissie and the resignation of its chairperson federal minister Clemens Jabloner, chairperson of the Alfred Hammerstein. In his words of farewell in this News- Art Restitution Advisory Board. The national committees letter you can read a number of arguments, which the reported to one another on their activities under the various committees need to examine on the basis of conditions of the pandemic and in other respects, enabling their own guidelines, as compiled in 2019 by our French us all to find out what was happening in other countries. colleagues in their “Guide to the Work of the Restituti- We should like to express our extreme gratitude to our on Committees”. We are eagerly looking forward to the British, Dutch, French and German colleagues – and discussions and wish our Dutch colleagues a successful friends – for their outstanding collaboration and, above and interesting presidency in 2021.

Goodbye,

Pia Schölnberger Clemens Jabloner Lisa Frank Administrative director Chairperson Provenance researcher, Bureau Commission for Provenance Research Art Restitution Advisory Board Commission for Provenance Research

2 January 2021 – N°8 NEWS RESTITUTIECOMMISSIE interests currently involved in the appraisal of restitution applications should be dropped. Examples of these are the significance of the work to the applicant, to the owner and The most important recommendations of the to public art holdings. The extent to which the applicant Committee for the Evaluation of the Restitut- may have endeavoured to recover the work previously may ion Policy for Cultural Heritage Objects from similarly no longer be taken into account. Ownership and the Second World War (the Kohnstamm Com- involuntary loss of possession remain key factors. mittee), published in its report “Streven naar Rechtvaardigheid” (“Striving for Justice”). What is the Restitutions Committee’s reaction to the They can be summarized as follows: advisory report “Striving for Justice”? We welcome the constructive recommendations in the report 1. Resume systematic research into the provenance of “Striving for Justice” because we expect that the recommen- artworks in the NK Collection and into the original ded assessment framework will give the appraisal of resti- owners and their heirs. Update the relevant databases tution applications greater transparency. The Restitutions and trace rightful owners wherever possible. Ensure Committee (RC) will use its best efforts to adapt its working that archives relevant to provenance research are as practices such that they are perceived as being less remote. accessible as possible. This will include intensifying communication with applicants 2. Incorporate an unambiguous assessment framework and formulating recommendations and decisions even more into the Decree Establishing the Restitutions Commit- understandably. As always, the Restitutions Committee’s tee that, in accordance with the Washington Principles, priority is to reach a “just and fair solution”, as expressed in focuses as much as possible on restitution or finding the Washington Principles in 1998. alternative solutions. 3. Improve the way applicants are treated and commu- Can the RC continue its work going forward until the nication about restitution procedures, and change the Minister adopts a policy position pursuant to the advisory procedure to make it less formalistic and, where neces- report? sary, to allow scope for the Restitutions Committee to Absolutely. The RC can ask the Restitutions Expertise Centre play a more mediating role. (ECR) to launch investigations into new restitution applica- 4. Establish a helpdesk under the responsibility of the tions, as it does currently. The ECR can furthermore continue Minister that ensures information is provided, both its current investigations. When the ECR’s investigation into passively and actively, about restitution policy natio- the facts is complete, the RC will ask the parties involved nally and internationally. whether they opt for an assessment of the application in ac- cordance with the current assessment framework or whether The Committee added its opinion that no termination date they prefer to wait for the case to be handled using the new should be set for Dutch restitution policy at this time. one. As things stand now, however, it is not yet clear to the parties involved (and the RC) what exactly the new assess- Interview with Acting Chair Els Swaab about ment framework will look like. the advisory report “Striving for Justice” from the Kohnstamm Committee. Given that the advisory report has been published and the fact that the RC has a positive opinion of it, isn’t it very How did the Minister respond to the Kohnstamm difficult to still appraise current cases using the old assess- Committee’s report? ment framework? The Minister expressed her appreciation for the committee’s As such that does not always need to work and the recommendations it made. Her comments be so. It is possible that the RC and were general in nature. the parties involved anticipate on the basis of the investigation into What does the proposed assessment framework look like? the facts that the assessment using The assessment framework continues to be based on nati- the old framework will very probably onally and internationally accepted principles such as the result in restitution. But as I said ear- Washington Principles. However, the Kohnstamm Com- lier, it is up to the parties involved to mittee recommends that a number of considerations and make a choice jointly. 3 NEWS January 2021 – N°8

Can the new assessment framework be considered as a threshold of 2021, which will be a special year for us be- “new fact” with regard to previous cases, in other words a cause the RC will mark its 20th anniversary and will also reason to reopen a closed case? take on the chair of the Network of European Restitution We assume that applicants may see a new assessment Committees on Nazi-Looted Art. It will be a pleasure and framework as a reason to submit a new application. an honour for me to contribute, together with the Acting Those are possible applications for which the procedure would Chair and the other RC members, and I look forward to have to be clearly spelled out by the Minister in the transitional getting to know you better in the near future. provisions. From the former chairman Alfred Hammerstein Do you expect that the proposed assessment framework is A few words of farewell more likely to lead to a positive result for applicants? In general, the proposed assessment framework would make For nearly four years it has been my honour to chair the the position of claimants stronger. This is because as soon Dutch Restitutions Committee. This has not been a as it has been established that the applicant is the original peaceful period because a great deal was happening. The rightful claimant or an heir, and that there was involuntary researchers, who used to work directly for the Commit- loss of possession, the other interests as such cannot lead to tee, moved to the Restitution Expertise Centre (NIOD). a recommendation to reject the claim. That also applies to They do their work there independently of the Committee. the good faith of the current owner. In that case, there will There has also been much criticism in the Netherlands and be restitution or more mediating decisions would be possible. other countries of some recommendations. This criticism is unjust in so far as it was asserted that the Restitutions When do you hope that the Minister will respond? What Committee gave greater weight to the interests of the will be the follow-up to the publication of this report? museum than to the claim for restitution of looted art. The RC hopes that the Minister issues her policy response Every application for restitution has to be considered soon so that there is clarity. The Minister’s Decree Establi- against the background of the horrors of the Holocaust, shing the Restitutions Committee and the RC’s Regulations and therefore there is great disappointment if the result of will both have to be amended. the procedure is not the desired one. A number of factors play a special role in this, such as the following. How is 2021 looking for you? It will be an extraordinary year. Currently I’m the Acting Chair. The expression looted art is used as though it has a spe- With effect from 1 January 2021 the Netherlands takes over cific meaning. The Washington Principles refer to “con- the chair of the Network of European Restitution Commit- fiscation”. This indicates that the artwork was actually tees on Nazi-Looted Art. This coincides with the RC’s twen- taken from the owner by the Nazis. The Dutch Committee tieth anniversary. You’ll be hearing from us again in the near employs the broad-based concept of involuntary loss of future. possession. This means that sale during the Nazi era can also have been involuntary as a result of the nature of the circumstances in which, for example, Jewish citizens were Message from Margriet Drent, Interim Secretary compelled to sell their belongings. I have been Interim Secretary of the Restitutions Committee The Principles call for a fair and just solution in the light (RC) since the end of November of the circumstances of the case. As argued by Professor 2020. Over the coming months Matthias Weller, among others, a weighing up of the I will deputize for Secretary Eric interests is consistent with this. Interests are, after all, Idema, who is ill. I started at a important circumstances including, of course, the circum- momentous time, when a num- stances in which ownership of the artwork was lost. Yet ber of developments coincided. there are also other circumstances that can play a role in a These were Fred Hammerstein’s moral-ethical assessment of a just solution. departure, a new Acting Chair and an evaluation report from There is, finally, one further circumstance about which the Kohnstamm Committee there is controversy regarding whether or not it should be about Dutch restitution policy considered. It relates to the status of the applicants. There that also concerns the RC and is no doubt that the direct descendants of the victim are the assessment of restitution entitled to restoration of rights, but it is an open question applications. We stand on the whether grandchildren and great-grandchildren also have 4 NEWS

a moral claim. This is not self-evident with regard to all other parties who follow in the victim’s footsteps on the basis of succession under property law. I hope that further thought will be given to these subjects within the scope of this excellent collaborative context so that the committees arrive at uniform solutions. I wish you every success in your work.

Dr. A. Hammerstein

© Centre Mondial de la Paix, des libertés et des droits de l’Homme

As Fred Hammerstein steps down as Chairman of the Dutch origin of the painting, the location of the spoliation and the Restitution Committee, the Network of European Restitution identification of the legitimate owners have not yet been Committees would like to acknowledge his commitment to precisely established. Today we are happy to announce its creation. In 2019, Mr Hammerstein enabled the Restitu- that we have finally found a place to welcome Nicolas tiecommissie to achieve a new level of cooperation with the Rousseau’s painting. French, Austrian, British and German committees: “Everyone involved found this opportunity to consult, co- With its particular involvement in Franco-German and operate and share information and ideas very useful” (ext- European relations, the World Centre for Peace, Freedom ract from Fred Hammerstein‘s Editorial in our third newslet- and Human Rights in Verdun is an ideal place to present ter). Mr Hammerstein has fully supported and implemented Nicolas Rousseau’s painting to the public and to advance the ideas of the “Fair and Just Solutions” conference in The research on the provenance of the painting, while con- Hague in 2012, where the idea of closer cooperation between tributing to the historical presentation of an exhibition the committees in Europe was born. module relating to the Second World War and becoming the custodian of this painting.

It was collected by Mr Hansch, director of the World Cen- tre, on 5 August 2020 at the CIVS offices in the French Embassy in Berlin, where it was temporarily stored. The return of this work of art to France is in line with the wishes CIVS & M2RS of Peter Forner, a German citizen, who owned the painting after his father was instructed by his superiors during the Second World War to bring it back to Germany. Forner : A painting returns to France Last year, we reported in the 3rd Newsletter that Peter From mid-August 2020, the painting has been exhibited Forner, a Berlin citizen, handed over a painting by the at the Centre, which receives around 60,000 visitors a year, French painter Nicolas Rousseau to the French state, re- in order to raise public awareness and advance the search presented by Ambassador Anne-Marie Descôtes, at the for the provenance of the painting. The official restitution French Embassy in Berlin. During the Second World War, of Nicolas Rousseau’s painting took place on 12 October the painting was transported from France to Berlin, where 2020 in Verdun with the support, among others, of Mar- it remained in the custody of the Forner family. tin Schulz, Honorary Co-Chairman of the World Centre, Faced with this unprecedented situation, the CIVS then Bruno Le Maire, Minister of Economic Affairs, Finance and devised an innovative solution, based on a deposit con- Recovery and Honorary Co-Chairman of the World Centre, tract, under the terms of which the work will be tempora- Michel Jeannoutot, Chairman of the CIVS, and David Zivie, rily deposited in the premises of the CIVS’s Berlin office head of the Mission de recherche et restitution des biens within the French Embassy in Berlin, pending its transfer culturels spoliés entre 1933 et 1945 (Ministry of Culture). to France.

Despite all the research carried out by the CIVS and the Mission de recherche et de restitution des biens cultu- rels spoliés entre 1933 et 1945 (Ministry of Culture), the 5 NEWS

SPOLIATION ADVISORY PANEL

New Publication: Museums and the Holocaust In January 2021, the Institute of Art and Law will pub- lish the second edition of Norman Palmer’s classic work, Museums and the Holocaust. In the twenty years since the first edition was published the scale of the looting and deprivation carried out during the years 1933–1945 has become ever more apparent, and looted art works are resurfacing in museums and galleries around the world. The ways in which museums and governments have responded to the challenges of achieving justice when confronted with claims vary greatly and this book looks at a representative sample of countries to examine their approaches to this issue and, where relevant, the legislati- on they have enacted.

The book contains chapters on each of the countries with restitution committees (Austria, France, Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom), together with a selection of other countries which highlight differences of approach (Australia, Greece, Hungary, Israel, Poland and the United States). Separate chapters examine issu- es of common concern, including the passing of title (ow- nership), limitation of actions and immunity from seizure. Transnational developments are also examined, including the discovery of the Gurlitt Hoard, the efforts of the Max Stern Art Restitution Project to recover lost works and the role of the Monuments Men during and in the aftermath of the Second World War.

Advance copies of the book will be available from mid- Original but not Enduring Title: Issues of Space and Time December and we are happy to offer readers of the Ruth Redmond-Cooper and Charlotte Dunn Newsletter a discount: the hardback will be on offer Loans: Immunity from Seizure and Suit until 15 February at the discounted rate of £35 (£70 on Charlotte Davy and Alexander Herman publication) and the paperback at £19 (£38 on publica- British Museums and Holocaust-Era Provenance Research tion): to place your order, go to: https://ial.uk.com/5zvq. Jacques Schuhmacher For further information, please email Ruth Redmond- Cooper: [email protected] Part II: National Perspectives United Kingdom MUSEUMS AND THE HOLOCAUST Charlotte Woodhead Table of Contents Germany Isabel von Klitzing and Carola Thielecke Foreword His Honour Judge Baumgartner Netherlands Preface Ruth Redmond-Cooper Evelien Campfens France Part I: The Issues Confronting Museums and Claimants Corinne Hershkovitch Art and the Nazi Terror Austria Norman Palmer Andreas Cwitkovits and Colette Huda The Looting of Art from Jewish Property under National Poland Socialist Tyranny: The Role of Nazi Legislation Nawojka Cieślińska-Lobkowicz Leonie Schwarzmeier 6 NEWS January 2021 – N°8

Hungary now lived abroad. As had been the case previously with Agnes Peresztegi objects from the Pollak collection in the Albertina and Israel Kunsthistorisches Museum, the Advisory Board once again Meir Heller, Keren Barth-Abelow and Talila Dvir recommended restitution because of the clear causal link Greece between the return of the objects to the museum and Anna Roza the issuance of an export authorization for the remaining USA objects. Nicholas O’Donnell Australia Lastly, a further fifty-one sheets from the Werkstätte für Andrew Dudley decorative Kunst in the Theatre Museum were recom- mended for restitution, in addition to the 1,500 costume Part III: International Perspectives designs and décor sketches already recommended for The Monuments Men: A Short Military and Legal History restitution. The proprietor, Wilhelm Berman, had offered Ian Upjohn to sell them to the museum shortly before his company The Gurlitt Collection was “Aryanized”. It is not known whether Bermann was Stephanie Drawdy ever paid. He was deported with his wife and daughter in The Max Stern Art Restitution Project autumn 1941 to Litzmannstadt (Łódź) and murdered there. Debbie de Girolamo Twenty Years of the Washington Principles: At the same session, the Board decided on the incorporat- Berlin Conference 2018 ion into it of the committee set up in parallel to investi- Emily Gould gate the provenance of objects in the Leopold Museum Privatstiftung and to have the provenance research in the Leopold Museum carried out in future under the super- vision of the Commission for Provenance Research.

KOMMISSION FÜR Lexicon of Provenance Research PROVENIENZFORSCHUNG Since December 2020, fifteen new entries have been added to the Lexicon of Provenance Research: Advisory Board Decisions Lotte Adametz On 25 September 2020, the Art Restitution Advisory Board Bernhard Altmann met for its ninety-sixth session. It recommended to the Sepp Finger Federal Minister of Art, Culture, Public Service and Otto Fürth Sport that a collection of molluscs in the Natural History Heeresgeschichtliches Museum Museum be restituted to Göttweig Abbey, which was Marcel Kammerer expropriated by the Nazis. You can find further details in Julius Kien the Case Study in this issue. Robert Mayer Georg Popper It also recommended the restitution of six objects from the Central-Antiquariat Moritz Stern collection of Albert Pollak in the Austrian Museum of Folk Friedrich Trauth Life and Folk Art in Vienna. After the Jewish businessman Hermann Trenkwald Albert Pollak had fled in December 1938 from his home- Leo Weiser Versandbuchhandlung town of Bielitz (Bielsko-Biala), he attempted in vain to Flora Wilhelm recover his seized art collection. Instead, it was dispersed Paul Zsolnay under the direction of Hans Posse among various museums, including the Museum of Folk Life and Folk Art. Although The website, which is to be relaunched in 2021, will also the fourteen objects there were restituted to Pollak’s heirs contain English versions of these entries. after 1945 – he had died in Dutch exile in 1943 – the Federal Monuments Office had six glass objects returned tothe museum as a condition for issuing authorization for the remaining objects to be exported to the heirs, who

7 January 2021 – N°8 CASE STUDIES RESTITUTION: MAX PECHSTEIN “NUS DANS UN PAYSAGE”

During its plenary session on 10 July 2020, the CIVS recom- sibly including a painting “Landscape with Nudes” by Max mended the restitution of Max Pechstein’s painting “Nus Pechstein, which later became part of the collection of the dans un paysage”, looted from Hugo Simon during the Musée national d’art moderne (MNAM) in Paris. occupation in France. Pechstein’s painting entered the French national collec- tions thanks to a young art inspector, who noticed the Hugo Simon (1880–1950) was a multifaceted character: painting in 1966 during a visit to the art depot of the Palais banker, politician, patron and art collector, he was one of de Tokyo. He discovered a “pile” of paintings and drawings the key figures in Berlin’s life during the Weimar Repub- without any annotation or even classification. Pechstein’s lic. In his villa in Berlin Tiergarten, he regularly welcomed painting attracted his attention particularly because there prominent personalities such as Max Liebermann, Thomas were then really few German Expressionists in the national Mann, Bertolt Brecht and Stefan Zweig, and on his walls collections. By an order of 13 September 1966, the status works by Monet and Pissarro were hung side-by-side with of this artwork was regularized. The painting entered the those of the German Expressionists such as Ernst Ludwig inventory of the art depository under the number 28.823 Kirchner, Erich Heckel and Max Pechstein. and was allocated to the MNAM, where it was entered in Like most German intellectuals, many of whom were the museum’s own inventory under the number 28.823 - Jewish, Hugo Simon had to flee the Nazi regime in 1933. Max Pechstein - Paysage 1912 - A.M. 4364 P. He and his wife Gertrude left Germany in March and ma- During his stay in Paris, Hugo Simon continued to lend naged to take a large part of their art collection with them. works, notably for the Exhibition of Twentieth Century They arrived in Paris in April 1933. A few months later, in German Art held at the New Burlington Gallery in London October, all their belongings in Germany were seized. They in July 1938, which included works by artists rejected by remained in Paris from March 1937 to June 1940, staying in Nazi Germany. On the back of Pechstein’s painting there various hotels and then renting an apartment at 102, rue is a two-part label mentioning this exhibition, including de Grenelle in the 7th arrondissement. In June 1940, they “Modern German Art”, and “Owner: Hugo Simon”. The were forced to leave Paris for Marseille and later to aban- exhibition catalogue mentions only one of Pechstein’s don war-torn Europe altogether and go into exile in Brazil, paintings belonging to Hugo Simon, “Italian Landscape”, where they arrived in March 1941. which could not refer to the painting “Landscape with A large part of Simon’s collection was looted by the ERR Nudes” because of its different size and title. However, it is (Einsatzstab Reichsleiter Rosenberg). Nevertheless, some now known that the catalogue did not include all the works of his possessions remained in his apartment in Paris, pos- in the exhibition. Lucy Wasensteiner and Martin Faass

© Musée des beaux-arts de Nancy 8 CASE STUDIES January 2021 – N°8 wrote in their publication “Defending ‘degenerate’ art” The Bank of Algeria gradually furnished its offices with his regarding the 1938 London exhibition that Hugo Simon had furniture. In 1964, the bank’s movable and immovable pro- loaned “at least 20 works”. perty were auctioned along with the last assets left in Hugo Later in November 1938 another exhibition took place in Simon’s former apartment (which the bank had kept as se- Paris, at the Maison de la Culture, rue d’Anjou, with the curity to cover the unpaid rent). title Free German Art, which featured some of the same Throughout this period, no paintings by Pechstein were artworks. It was organized by the art critic Paul Westheim, restored to Hugo Simon and then his wife and daughters. himself a refugee in Paris, who had been one of the orga- In the meantime, Germany admitted the spoliation of nizers of the London exhibition. Paul Westheim’s archives, Hugo Simon in the BRüG proceedings. stolen in Paris by the Germans, then seized by the Soviets How and why the painting arrived in the art depot of the and now kept in Moscow, revealed lists of artworks drawn Palais de Tokyo, where the young art inspector “disco- up for the London and Paris exhibitions, including many vered” it in 1966, is unknown. There is no documentary evi- works belonging to Hugo Simon. dence or trace of a purchase of the painting by the state or At the end of 1940/beginning of 1941, the ERR seized the a public institution, whether for a fee or free of charge. contents of the apartment on rue de Grenelle. Only three The way the painting became part of a public collection Pechsteins, which do not correspond to the MNAM’s, is therefore suspicious. Moreover, the MNAM considered appeared on the ERR list. On 15 and 16 October 1941, six the entry to be “irregular”. Consequently and with account boxes of objects from Hugo Simon’s apartment left the taken of the above-mentioned aspects, the CIVS advisory Jeu de Paume for Germany. The ERR inventory descri- panel, based on research by the Mission de recherche et bed the so-called “degenerate” works in Hugo Simon’s de restitution des biens culturels spoliés entre 1933 et 1945 collection as “vernichtet” (“intended for destruction”). (Ministry of Culture), recommended that the work should Hugo Simon’s apartment was extensively looted by the be removed from the national collections “on account of ERR. However, not everything was removed: testimo- improper registration”. The Commission considered that ny written by Rose Valland indicated that there was still Simon was deprived of this painting because of the war’s furniture in the apartment when Paris was liberated. In circumstances, regardless of the way the work ended up 1944, the Bank of Algeria, the owner of the building, drew in the Palais de Tokyo. Hugo Simon had to flee France, up a list of all the remaining assets. leaving his home, which was largely looted, and he was After the liberation of Paris, the apartment was requisiti- unable to find this painting by Max Pechstein, which later oned by the Administration des Domaines (administrati- reappeared at the Palais de Tokyo. The fact remains that on of state-owned property). Mrs Kahn, who lived in the neither Hugo Simon, nor any of his heirs, nor his agents re- apartment, complained about the furniture left on the pre- covered possession of “Landscape with Nudes” or consen- mises. An inventory of Hugo Simon’s furniture in Kahn’s ted to sell it. Today, the MNAM/CCI supports the return to apartment was drawn up in July 1948, with the mention of its status quo ante bellum. one painting: “grande toile cadre doré” (Red House). The proceedings initiated with the CIVS and the Mission de Hugo Simon submitted his claim to the Commission for Art recherche et restitution des biens culturels spoliés entre Recovery from Brazil, quoting his collection from memory. 1933 et 1945 (Ministry of Culture) at the initiative of Hugo In 1946, he mentioned the Expressionist paintings and se- Simon’s successor, led by his great-grandson, will result in veral artists, including Pechstein, without giving any title the painting being returned to its rightful owner. or size. In 1947 and 1948, artworks and furniture were returned to Hugo Simon. The Pechstein was not one of them.

Göttweig Abbey: a case study Provenance research in the Natural History from the Catholic Göttweig Abbey in Lower Austria, both Museum of which were acquired by the NHM during the Nazi era. This article provides a brief explanation of the case. Since the adoption of the Art Restitution Act in 1998, the collections at the Natural History Museum in Vienna Göttweig Abbey (NHM) have also been investigated for objects confis- cated by the Nazis. In 2019/20, the team, formed in 2017, Göttweig Abbey in the Wachau, Lower Austria, was foun- investigated a herbarium (collection of preserved plants ded in 1083. After Melk, it is the oldest Benedictine abbey or plant components) and a collection of mollusc shells in Lower Austria, and because of its location on a hill it is 9 CASE STUDIES December 2020 – N°8 often referred to as the “Austrian Monte Cassino”. The ab- bey has a library, museum, archive and music archive, and a graphic, numismatic and art collection. In the year 2000 it was included in the UNESCO World Heritage list with the abbeys of Melk and Göttweig and the old town of Krems as part of the Wachau Cultural Landscape.

Göttweig Abbey during the Nazi era Although the abbey’s independence was not immediate- ly threatened after the annexation of Austria to the Nazi German Reich in March 1938, its affiliated institutions were closed that same year. The private school and boys’ choir Crate mollusc shells Göttweig Abbey © NHM Wien, Thomas Mayer school were dissolved and several properties expropriated. During the annexation by the Nazis of Sudetenland, an ar- tion of Austria with the German Reich, on 15 September the tillery company with 120 soldiers was billeted in the abbey. Vienna Gestapo ordered the complete expropriation of the abbey in favour of the city of Krems. Thereafter, practically The abbey was expropriated at the start of the “Kloster- all of the furniture was removed from the building along sturm”, during which around 300 Catholic abbeys and with the art and natural history collections. other church establishments were seized and expropriated between 1940 and 1942. In many cases their assets were All of the abbey’s efforts to legally protest against the ex- confiscated as being “inimical to the State and the Volk”. propriation failed and it was dependent on donations from other dioceses for its survival. Directly after the appointment of a temporary administra- tor in February 1939, the monks were interrogated in the The empty building was now used for other purposes. In abbey and at the Vienna Gestapo headquarters so as to ob- October 1940, Germans resettled from Bessarabia and af- tain material for the expropriation. Several of the monks ter September 1941 from Bukovina and Serbia, and also suffered violence during the interrogations. After their French prisoners of war were all housed in the abbey. From release in April 1939, they were forbidden from returning January 1943 to early 1945 there was a National Political to the abbey and were put under house arrest in a rectory School of Education (Napola) in the abbey. During this time belonging to it. The Gestapo accused the monks of sexual students destroyed some of the interior. Towards the end abuse – there had in fact been court cases for sexual abuse, of the war the building escaped war damage, but it was which were already concluded before 1938 – and of mis- plundered after the arrival of the Red Army on 8 May 1945. management. Following the approval of the Reich Ministry of the Interior and the Reich Commissar for the Reunifica- Confiscation of the natural history collections Mollusc shells from Göttweig Abbey © NHM Wien, Thomas Mayer After 1940 most of the contents of the abbey, including manuscripts, books and paintings, were removed from the abbey and dispersed among various institutions. The na- tural history collections – a herbarium and a collection of minerals – were transferred initially to the Stadtmuseum in Krems.

The herbarium was split up. A small part went to the mu- seum of Reichsgau Niederdonau, while the majority was transferred to the Botanical Department of the NHM. The- reafter, all trace was lost and it is assumed that it was either destroyed in a fire at the museum depot at the end of May 1945 or exchanged afterwards.

The second natural history collection transferred from the abbey to the NHM was the collection of mollusc and snail shells from various terrestrial, fresh water and marine CASE STUDIES January 2021 – N°8

animals compiled in the nineteenth century. The crate In March 2020, eight fascicles from the original herbarium containing the collection remained unopened in the NHM were returned to abbey representatives. for decades. The objects were neither inventoried nor pro- cessed or exhibited. It was not until an inventory in 2003 A further indication from the Göttweig Abbey collection that the crate was discovered. The NHM contacted the ab- manager Bernhard Rameder referred to the crate contai- bey, but the crate remained at the museum. ning the mollusc shells that was thought still to be in the NHM, a supposition confirmed by Anita Eschner, head of Given the fact that the shells were packed in cigarette the NHM mollusc collection. On the basis of the dossier on packets and matchboxes, sawdust and newspapers from the confiscation of the herbarium and shells from Göttweig 1940 (see photo), the current container, a wooden crate Abbey, the Austrian Art Restitution Advisory Board recom- measuring approx. 50 cm × 30 cm × 30 cm, is thought to be mended to the Federal Minister of Art, Culture, Public Ser- the same crate as the one used for transport in 1941. vice and Sport at its ninety-sixth session on 25 September 2020 that the shells be returned from the NHM to Göttweig Abbey. This also applied to the herbarium, “should it be Attempts at restitution after 1945 and recom- identified in the course of further research into the NHM’s mendation for return in 2020 holdings”. As the Catholic church and its orders were not Although Göttweig Abbey attempted to have all of the subject in general to persecution by the Nazi regime, the confiscated properties, furnishings and collections - retur Board had to determine whether the objects from Gött- ned after 1945, the natural history collections were not weig Abbey had in fact been confiscated. In view of the Ge- explicitly mentioned in the restitution proceedings and stapo order of 15 November 1939, it considered that this out-of-court settlements. This could have been due to was indeed the case. the fact that the abbey was unaware of the whereabouts http://www.provenienzforschung.gv.at/beiratsbeschlues- of the herbarium and shell collection at the time. Most of se/Stift_Goettweig_2020-09-25.pdf the confiscated assets were returned after 1945, but the natural history collections remained in the possession of Dario Alejandro Luger has been a provenance researcher the NHM and the province of Lower Austria. at the NHM on behalf of the Commission for Provenance Research since 2017. Andreas Liška-Birk, the provenance researcher for the Thomas Mayer is a science historian and has been a Lower Austria Provincial Collections drew the attention of provenance researcher at the NHM on behalf of the the provenance research team at the NHM to the confis- Commission for Provenance Research since 2019. cation of the Göttweig herbarium. In 2019 he had written a dossier on the part of the herbarium that was still owned by what was now the federal province of Lower Austria.

REPORTS 2019 CIVS ACTIVITY REPORT

The 2019 CIVS Activity Report has been published and is now available online in English and French, with the German version to follow in January. This special editi- on reviews the activities carried out by the Commission for Compensation of Victims of Spoliation (CIVS) during 2019. For the first time this year, the CIVS celebrated the implementation of the new mechanism ordered by the Prime Minister to promote the restitution of looted art, in particular artworks kept in museums.

Michel Jeannoutot © Thierry Marro, France Stratégie 11 January 2021 – N°8

This year, the Commission’s report is notable for two reasons:

First, it looks back on the twenty years (1999–2019) during which the Commission has carried out its mission of reparation for antisemitic spoliations perpetrated during the occupation.

Second, its thematic section is devoted to the Proceedings of the Colloquium organized on 15 November 2019 to cele- brate the twentieth anniversary of the CIVS.

Discover the 2019 CIVS Activity Report

PERSONALIA: JANINE DRAI

The ten members of the CIVS advisory board are appointed included the nomination of Janine Drai to succeed every three years by decree of the Prime Minister. When it Dominique Schnapper. sits in ordinary plenary session, the CIVS Council is compo- sed of two councillors at the Court of Cassation, two state Ms Drai is an adviser at the Court of Cassation and she councillors, two senior councillors at the Court of Auditors, chairs the investigating committee of the Court of Justice two university professors and two experts. Since 2017, it of the French Republic. She is also a member of the disci- has had an equal number of men and women. plinary commission of the French Anti-Doping Agency. Fi- nally, she set up the “crime against humanity” unit at the This year, the Council was renewed by a decree of Paris Court of First Instance. 2 September 2020. Michel Jeannoutot and François Bernard were confirmed in their positions as - Chair man and Vice-Chairman of the CIVS. This renewal also

JUST ACT – JUSTICE FOR UNCOMPENSATED SURVIVORS TODAY

The report commissioned by the US government under the https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/ Justice for Uncompensated Survivors Today Act (JUST Act) JUST-Act5.pdf is accessible online. The purpose of this legislation is to evaluate the reparation policies implemented by European In general, the US State Department considers that countries in connection with Nazi crimes (compensation, “progress is too slow” in the field of research and memoirs, testimony, educational programmes, etc.). “The restitution of looted cultural property, pointing in JUST Act Report is an essential tool for highlighting the particular the “bureaucratic inertia” and stressing the important actions countries have taken to provide urgency of action to be taken in view of the rise of anti- restitution or compensation for property confiscated semitism throughout Europe. during the Holocaust or subsequently nationalized during the Communist era”. More specifically, the aim is to assess The Network of European Restitution Committees on the progress made since 2009 by the forty-six signatory Nazi-Looted Art is highlighted as a “positive trend”. countries of the Terezín Convention.

The report, which is broadly descriptive, provides an over- view of the measures in each of these countries: 12 REPORTS January 2021 – N°8

Forfeiture of assets – Austrian post-war justice and restitution as illustrated by the watchmaker Bartholomäus Schmid

During the online annual meeting of Forum Justizge- the courts were able to pronounce the forfeiture of the schichte on the subject “Theft without restitution?”, convicted person’s assets in favour of the Republic of Konstantin Ferihumer from the Commission for Pro- Austria. On 30 November 1945, the Amendments to the venance Research delivered a paper entitled “Forfeitu- Provisions on the Forfeiture of Assets (Ergänzung der re of assets – Austrian post-war justice and restitution as Bestimmungen über den Vermögensverfall) dealt with illustrated by the watchmaker Bartholomäus Schmid”. He a problem that had not been considered hitherto: suggested that restitution in the early post-war period in individuals convicted by a Volksgericht were by definition Austria was shaped not only by specific restitution and ex- National Socialist perpetrators. This meant that among port laws but also by criminal law provisions, particularly the assets forfeited by them could well have been items in the form of the Austrian “Volksgericht” system and the confiscated from persons persecuted during the Nazi era. forfeiture of assets pronounced by these courts. Section 1.1 of the Amendments therefore stated that such assets were to be “set apart”. Although this was meant to make restitution easier, the law contained no provisions Volksgericht jurisdiction and forfeiture of assets as to how the provenance was to be determined and, in After the Second World War, the Provisional Government particular, who should be responsible for it in the future. of Austria established special courts to prosecute Nazi crimes. The Prohibition Act (Verbotsgesetz) of 8 May 1945 The case of Schmid and the War Criminals Act (Kriegsverbrechergesetz) of 26 June 1945 laid the foundations for the ten years during Directly after the annexation of Austria to the National which the Volksgericht system was in operation. Most Socialist German Reich in March 1938, Bartholomäus of the Prohibition Act is still in force today, including the Schmid (born on 2 August 1906 in Prien am Chiemsee, provisions banning NSDAP activities and the public de- Bavaria), a watchmaker resident in Vienna, managed on nial, trivialization, endorsement and justification of Nazi account of his long-standing links with the NSDAP milieu, crimes. Apart from imprisonment and the death penalty, to make a career in the city administration. He occupied key positions during the “Aryanization” of the watch, clock and jewellery sector. In December 1938, he also “Aryanized” the watch and jewellery business of Ernst Steiner, which was situated in a prime location in Vienna. His rising finan- cial fortunes during the Nazi era enabled him to acquire artworks, including the oil painting “Interior of a Larder” by Hubertus van Hove. It had previously been part of the Gomperz family collection, deemed Jewish, and had been seized by the Gestapo, from whom Schmid purchased it.

In a case before the Vienna Volksgericht after the Second World War, the court ordered the securing of Schmid’s small art collection consisting of eleven paintings and watercolours. Three objects that had disappeared, including “Interior of a Larder”, were labelled as “war losses”. Schmid was sentenced in March 1948 to two years’ imprisonment with the forfeiture of his assets in accordance with the Prohibition Act. Thereupon, most of his forfeited art collection was handed over to the Viennese

Ernst Steiner’s former business, source: Die Uhrmacherkunst, vol. 66, no. 7, 14 February 1941, p. 47; picture: SLUB Dresden / Digitale Sammlungen / 318594536; original: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Chronometrie e.V. Barthololmäus Schmid at REPORTS the First Greater German Assembly of Watchmakers in Vienna on 20 January auction house Dorotheum and auctioned. Ernst 1939, source: Uhrmacher- Steiner, who had spent the Nazi era in exile in the USA, kunst, 10 February 1939, applied for restitution of his business, which was granted p. 103 [118]; picture: SLUB in 1952 – for the time being. Dresden / Digitale Samm- lungen / 318594536; origi- Schmid had appealed against the sentence, and his Volks- nal: Deutsche Gesellschaft gericht trial was reopened in 1953. The 1948 conviction was für Chronometrie e.V. repealed and the case was taken back to the preliminary investigation stage and abandoned a short time after- those of the Steiner business. The auction of Schmid’s pain- wards. This meant that the restitution decision of 1952 tings in the Dorotheum and the unquestioning return of the was no longer valid, resulting in a paradoxical situation paintings in 1966 reflect the absence of procedural regulat- whereby the original owner of the business was required ions to set apart assets of questionable provenance and their to return it to the “Aryanizer”. If that were not enough, offhand treatment. This was also prompted by the rapidly when two of the lost pictures from Schmid’s collec- dwindling political will to prosecute Nazi crimes in Austria. tion, including the work by Hubertus van Hove, turned Schmid at least received a lenient sentence in 1948, but his up in 1966, they were returned to Schmid. The clear evi- specious account of the affair to a completely non-trans- dence in the files of the confiscation by the Nazis ofat parent appeal board was sufficient to have this decision re- least one of the two paintings was completely ignored. versed a few years later – with wide-ranging consequences.

Konstantin Ferihumer is provenance researcher on behalf Summary of the Commission for Provenance Research, from 2016 to This case illustrates how closely criminal law was connec- 2020 at the Academy of Fine Arts Vienna and since 2021 at ted with restitution and Austria’s policy towards its past. the Leopold Museum. Whereas the forfeiture had a direct effect on the redistri- bution of assets after the war, it also had a direct influence on the restitution of potentially confiscated assets, such as

From the “Washington Principles” to the “Handreichung”

In 1998, the Conference on Holocaust-Era Assets took the Washington Principles, however, has a different goal. place in Washington, where 44 participating states affir- Its concern is not so much the authentication of an object med their commitment to the so-called Washington Prin- to a specific artist, but rather the broader political, legal ciples, 11 non-binding guidelines on how to handle cultu- and economic circumstances under which a work changed ral assets confiscated by the National Socialists. Germany hands in recent history. In other words, the scope of prove- was among the participants and in the following set out to nance research extends far beyond the search for proof of implement the adopted principles. In December 1999, the ownership. It covers artists’ circles and dealers’ networks, Federal Government, Federal States and local authorities the fates of entire collections and even the buying strate- issued a “Joint Statement”, in which they agreed to ensure gies of individual institutions, while including political con- “that works of art that have been identified as Nazi-confis- siderations, legal frameworks and economic implications. cated property and can be attributed to specific claimants are returned, upon individual examination, to the legiti- The limits of conventional authenticity research thus ex- mate former owners or their heirs”. As a result, several panded significantly. Therefore, it was all the more impor- German museums established initial – mostly temporary – tant to establish orientation criteria for public institutions positions for provenance researchers. to consult for when examining their own collections to determine whether a particular piece was originally confis- Both public institutions and provenance researchers were cated as a result of National Socialist persecution or not. thus facing a new challenge. Examining the provenance The result was the so-called “Handreichung”, guidelines of cultural works as such was not a new discipline. The art for public institutions, initiated by the Federal Government, market and the academic field of art history had always Federal States and local authorities and prepared in pro- been concerned with establishing the authenticity and uti- fessional cooperation with representatives of museums, lization context of works of art in order to confirm the value libraries and archives. It was completed on February 1, of a piece. Provenance research as established following 2001. The “Handreichung” consolidated existing insights 14 REPORTS January 2021 – N°8 about persons involved, circumstances and types of art persecution” even in the absence of direct state interventi- deals, with view to developing a matrix. This encompassed on. In this regard, the “Handreichung” follows the Military a relatively detailed index of indicating grounds for con- Government law no. 59 more or less verbatim. This is true cern with regard to potential of confiscation as a result of of numerous definitions of terms as well as with regard to National Socialist persecution, such as: National Socialist the criteria under which sales of cultural goods can also be organizations on the buyer’s side, notorious art dealers, considered National Socialist seizures. large acquisitions in the form of donations, conspicuous The Military Government law no. 59 first defined what is provenance gaps, or transactions in occupied territories. envisaged by “confiscated property”, in order to then es- tablish a basic “presumption of confiscation”. Whenever The “Handreichung” was fundamentally revised in 2007 a person who was persecuted, be it individually or collec- and 2019. While the criteria in the guidelines were not tively, concluded a legal transaction – in particular a sale fundamentally changed, they were enhanced by insights – it was presumed in that person’s favor that the asset was gained during the intervening years, so that the original seized unlawfully. This presumption could in turn be refu- 20-page booklet has now nearly doubled in size. Another ted if “the transferor was paid a fair purchase price”, alt- notable difference is an increased sensitivity for multiple hough proof of this alone was not sufficient if the seller was persecution contexts in which cultural goods could be con- denied “the free right of disposal of the purchase price”. fiscated during the National Socialist era. While the 2001 edition merely mentioned cultural goods of “definitely Transactions after September 15, 1935 – the date of the Jewish provenance” as examples of dubious acquisitions, infamous Nuremberg Laws – were assessed even more the focus has been broadened since 2007 to include all stringently. As a general rule, any legal transaction could cultural goods of “unclear provenance” or items with pro- be challenged. The only exception was when “the trans- venance gaps. In other words, for a case to be considered action as such and with its essential terms would have suspect, confirmed Jewish ownership of an item during the taken place even in the absence of National Socialism” National Socialist era is no longer a prerequisite; it is suf- or “the transferee protected the property interest of the ficient if Jewish ownership cannot be ruled out. claimant […] in an unusual manner and with sub- stantial success, for example, by helping him in transfer- In its overall organization, the “Handreichung” exercises ring his assets abroad or through similar assistance.” All the option recognized in the Washington Principles of put- these considerations are repeated virtually verbatim in ting the abstractly formulated goals of the principles in the “Handreichung”; however, the latter also includes in practice in accordance with nation-state traditions. Parti- its periodization the “Vertraulicher Erlass Nr. 64” (con- cularly for German law, confronting facts where moral sen- fidential decree) of May 14, 1938 and the “Verordnung se demands a reversal of transactions possibly conducted über den Einsatz jüdischen Vermögens” (Ordinance on the under a mantle of legality, was nothing new. Such constel- Use of Jewish Assets) of December 3, 1938, which largely lations had been the object of legal regulations time and prohibited the Jewish population from dealing in valuab- again since 1945. The first was the United States Military le works of art. For any transactions occurring after this Government law no. 59 on the “restitution of identifiab- point in time, the “Handreichung” considers proof of free le property to victims of National Socialist repression” of disposal of the purchase price to be practically impossible. November 10, 1947 and the subsequent regulations for the British zone and Berlin (both dating from 1949). The Point 11 of the Washington Principles called upon the sta- principles set forth in that law were in turn adopted by the tes “to develop national processes to implement these Federal Republic after its inception, both at the state and principles, particularly as they relate to alternative dispu- federal level, and were finally summarized – though parti- te resolution mechanisms for resolving ownership issues”. ally in significantly moderated form – the Federal Indemni- Since there was no longer any legal recourse for the resti- fication Law (Bundesentschädigungsgesetz, 1953/56) and tution of Nazi-looted art due to the statute of limitations, the Federal Law on Restitution (Bundesrückerstattungs- institutions needed to be established which could bring gesetz, 1957). about “fair and just solutions” to individual cases under dispute, outside of judicial proceedings. In consequence, The “Handreichung” used these historic precursors to the “Advisory Commission on the return of cultural proper- substantially extend the general clauses of the Washing- ty seized as a result of Nazi persecution, especially Jewish ton Principles on one salient point. While the Washington property” was founded in Germany in 2003. Notably, the Principles deal exclusively with “confiscated art”, a major Advisory Commission therefore directly owes its creation portion of the “Handreichung” is dedicated to the problem to the Washington Principles, even though the Principles of defining what constitutes “loss due to National Socialist only deal explicitly with the exact circumstances which 15 REPORTS January 2021 – N°8

the Advisory Commission has never dealt with to this day: ces of individual cases, as their complexities and historical that of confiscated art. Where cultural goods of persecut- uniqueness often do not fit the constraints of overly strict ed persons were confiscated by the state, confiscation as a standardization. The procedure according to the “Hand- result of National Socialist persecution is generally so obvi- reichung” is therefore deliberately open; in particular, it ous that the works of art in question are returned without waives numerous legal formalities that would be necessary contention. The exception to the rule: Works of so-called for an actual forensic proceeding, giving greater scope to a “degenerate” art were also seized; they were removed from discussion of moral questions. This also allows it to address museums for propagandistic purposes and either sold or the problem of burden of proof raised in Point 4 of the destroyed. However, private owners were only affected Washington Principles. At the same time, the “Hand- by these measures if their cultural property was on loan reichung” does not formulate a task to right historical in- to public institutions, and even then without considerati- justice in general. The matrix of the “Handreichung” only on of the person. To this day, the loss of “degenerate art” applies in cases where historical injustice occurred in the is therefore not considered to be a result of individual or form of a violation of property rights of cultural goods. collective National Socialist persecution. In this sense as well, the purpose of the “Handreichung” remains bound to the Washington Principles. As a whole, the “Handreichung” endeavors to provide a clearer outline to the “fair and just solutions” demanded Benjamin Lahusen by the Washington Principles. It deliberately forgoes rigid Head of the office of the Advisory Commission rules, in order to do justice to the particular circumstan-

20th anniversary of the Arbeitskreis Provenienzforschung e.V.

By signing the Washington Principles on Holocaust-Era – was already the fundamental goal of the “Arbeitskreis” in Assets on December 3, 1998, the signatory states commit- 2000, especially in view of the non-existence of basic re- ted themselves to intensify research on works of art con- search and research literature at that time. These aspects fiscated during the National Socialist era, to identify them are still the main goal of the “Arbeitskreis Provenienzfor- transparently, to locate the pre-war owners or their heirs schung e.V.” existing today. It is significant, however, that and to find “just and fair solutions”. despite the clear demands of the Washington Principles as well as the subsequently published joint declaration of Two years later, in November 2000, four researchers or- the German Länder and the municipalities in December ganized a meeting in Cologne on the topic of “Museums 1999 (see the article by B. Lahusen above, p.14), this initi- and Art under National Socialism”. These researchers, all of ative did not come from politics but from the researchers them women, were Dr. Ute Haug (Hamburger Kunsthalle), themselves. Dr. Ilse von zur Mühlen (Bayerische Staatsgemäldesamm- lungen, Munich), Laurie A. Stein (The Art Institute of Chica- The need for a constant exchange of information about go Museum / St. Louis Art Museum), and Katja Terlau (Wall- resources, relevant archival holdings, libraries and data- raf-Richartz-Museum, Cologne). They met to share their bases, as well as finding the right contacts, e.g. in the ideas on approaches and research methods in this field for art trade, but also for questions about (related) research the first time. This exchange of colleagues, organized on projects, restitution cases, led to the establishment of a their own initiative, was indispensable, especially in view steadily growing community of researchers, which formed of the lack of (institutional) experience, official guidelines, the basis for the now unique international network. The or firmly established methods for dealing with cultural pro- colleagues met twice a year in changing cities and pre- perty from unclear ownership that could have been drawn sented and discussed projects, case studies and problems upon. The term provenance research did not yet play an together. They established specialized working groups to explicit role here. It was not until a second meeting of an establish methods and standards for provenance research extended group of people in February 2001 in Hamburg (data). This commitment cannot be appreciated enough. that the term “Arbeitskreis Provenienzforschung” was fi- The first public conferences in 2001 and 2002 were form- nally established. The exchange of knowledge, informati- ative for the development of this very young field on and data as well as the better coordination of research of research and helped to raise awareness of the to- steps – which then as now take place under time pressure pic in public museums. Initial contacts with important 16 REPORTS January 2021 – N°8 political decisionmakers such as the Koordinierungsstelle Kommission für Provenienzforschung, or the Schweizeri- für Kulturgutverluste in Magdeburg, the Federal Govern- scher Arbeitskreis Provenienzforschung. The association ment Commissioner for Culture and the Media (BKM), and promotes the systematic research of museal collections the Kulturstiftung der Länder were instrumental in setting by strengthening the professional position of its members the course for the development of provenance research in and advocating a systematic and permanent integration of Germany. provenance research into museums, libraries, archives, the Although until then there had only been a loosely-knit art market, and academic research. and completely independent network of researchers, the increasing development and institutionalization of the fun- The focus of research is particularly on objects taken as a ding situation for provenance research in Germany, parti- result of Nazi persecution, but in recent years it has increa- cularly through the Arbeitsstelle für Provenienzforschung singly been extended to contexts such as objects seized in at the Stiftung Preußischer Kulturbesitz in Berlin, which the Soviet occupation zone or the former GDR, as well as was founded in 2008, gradually forced the working group objects taken in a colonial context. Several working groups to consider (re)constituting itself. While the number of par- facilitate the accessibility of archival sources or develop ticipants grew steadily, the working group was confronted professional standards either for a regional focus (e.g. with the consequences of the (often short-term) tempora- France) or a thematic focus (such as Judaica, Postcolonial ry employment contracts of its members. For this reason, Provenance Research or Digital Methods, etc.). In additi- two spokespersons were elected for the first time in July on to identifying so-called wrongfully appropriated items, 2011, whose task was the internal and external coordinati- this research also advances knowledge about the history on of the Arbeitskreis. By April 2014, it had already develo- of collections and institutions in order to understand the ped into an alliance of over 90 members, who finally voted processes of authentication, (value) attribution, manifes- for the transformation into a registered nonprofit associa- tation, or appropriation of what is now defined as cultural tion. In November 2014, the foundation of the Arbeitskreis property. Provenienzforschung e.V. (Association for Provenance Re- Since 2019, the international “Day of Provenance Re- search) was proclaimed, the statutes were announced and search” has taken place once a year in April with contribu- its first board with five members was elected. tions from all over the world (in 2020 via social media only). This initiative of one of our working groups draws interna- Since then, the association has been expanding its struc- tional attention to the social and academic relevance of tures and is constantly accepting new members. Today the complex work of provenance researchers, explains and the Arbeitskreis für Provenienzforschung e.V. is a nonpro- communicates the diverse issues and methods of this field fit membership organization for the promotion of- prove of research, and introduces itself to a broad audience. nance research in all its interdisciplinary variety. As the world‘s largest organization of professional provenance Although the Arbeitskreis Provenienzforschung e.V. is the researchers, the Arbeitskreis is committed to the further only international network of its kind and can be consi- development and sustainability of its field. In 2020, it lists dered a success story in every respect, we are still at the more than 350 members with backgrounds in art history, beginning of our work. The Arbeitskreis is committed to history and contemporary history, linguistics and literary improving the working conditions at public and private in- studies, archaeology, ethnology, and law. Our colleagues stitutions that employ researchers predominantly on work in museums, in the public sector, in the art market, short-term contracts (examining hundreds, sometimes at universities or as independent researchers in Germany, even thousands of objects) as part of externally funded Great Britain, the Netherlands, France, Austria, Switzer- projects, thus jeopardizing the sustainability of the project land or the USA. and the long-term documentation of the research results. Finally, this results in a lack of professional anchoring in In an attempt to promote direct personal and professio- academic or non-academic research and instruction and nal exchange, the Arbeitskreis holds one general assem- thus a lack of methods as well as strategies for sustainable bly per year, usually in November (this year‘s anniversary (digital) research infrastructures – not only in Germany. assembly, however, had to be postponed until April 19–20, 2021, due to COVID-19). The Arbeitskreis maintains a lively Although the “Washington Declaration” of 1998 has led exchange with relevant political and cultural institutions to important initiatives in European countries, these are such as the German Lost Art Foundation (DZK), the Deut- not coordinated internationally. And although a central scher Museumsbund, ICOM Germany, the Kulturstiftung funding institution has been established in Germany since der Länder, the BKM (Federal Government Commissioner 2015 in the form of the Deutsches Zentrum Kulturgut- for Culture and the Media), the CIVS, the Österreichische verluste (DZK) in Magdeburg, this has proved rather an 17 FIELD REPORT January 2021 – N°8

obstacle to international project structures. Although re- been covered in the contexts of injustice as well as in post- searchers – especially in Germany as the former perpetra- war societies. And we still produce isolated and intranspa- tor state – are readily used as political figureheads in the rent “knowledge silos” based on inconsistent content and “restitution marathon”, at the same time they have no valid semantic as well as technological standards, depending on legal basis whatsoever, but must refer to definitions and the respective national policy in Europe. And this is not only guidelines from the Allied occupation law, which has lost a burden for us, but also for survivors and their relatives. its legal validity for decades. To work together on a “fair and just”, which also means an efficient and sustainable provenance research – this Therefore, last year on December 3, 2019, in a hearing at is what we owe not only to our members but also to the the EU Parliament in Brussels, the Arbeitskreis appealed victims of the most atrocious war crimes. Looking back on for more recognition of our research at the international the success story of the Arbeitskreis in the last twenty ye- level, for more cross-national cooperation, for inter- and ars gives us hope that we can also achieve a lot within the transnational funding programs for long-term (= sus- next twenty years. Please support our association in this tainable) research models, for the establishment of shared endeavor – we can only address this challenge together! terminologies, guidelines and definitions (e.g. on “flight goods”) as well as for the legal protection and preservation Meike Hopp, Carolin Lange of our work. We still cannot grasp the dimension of dispos- Vorstand Arbeitskreis Provenienzforschung e.V. session, relocation, and looting because the traces have https://arbeitskreis-provenienzforschung.org/ FIELD REPORT The bureau of the Commission for Provenance Research seen from the outside

During an internship from October to mid-December, I on earlier restitutions from the years after 1945, depot lists was able to obtain a profound insight into the multiface- and other documents in the Federal Monuments Office ted tasks of the bureau of the Austrian Commission for archive often provide an initial indication regarding art- Provenance Research. The members – Anneliese works possibly or actually confiscated. To answer the in- Schallmeiner, Anita Stelzl-Gallian and Lisa Frank – who quiries, it is often necessary to consult external archives can only be described as excellent in both professional and as well. Asset declarations in the Austrian State Archive, human terms, gave me theoretical and practical instruction for example, provide the information that many inquirers to enable me to work on some of the broad spectrum of are looking for. These declarations were made pursuant to activities undertaken by the bureau. Because of the short the Regulation on the Declaration of Jewish Assets of 26 time and the limited nature of my activity, however, I was April 1938 (dRGBl. 1938 I p. 414, GBlÖ 102/1938), which mostly an observer, a status which my colleagues tell me required all persons considered Jewish in the meaning of is sufficient for a field report. What follows is therefore an the Nuremberg Laws of 1935 (dRGBl. 1935 I S. 1146, GBlÖ insight, albeit far from comprehensive, into the core or hub 150/1938), their non-Jewish spouses and relatives living in of the Austrian Commission for more than twenty years. the same household to list their assets as at 27 April 1938. As such they are key documents in connection with peo- ple in Austria who were persecuted, disenfranchised and What does the bureau of the Commission do? expropriated because they were Jews. The bureau is located in the Federal Monuments Office, whose archives contain readily accessible information A typical inquiry might say: “We have a painting here by essential for provenance research. These archives pro- x that used to belong to the collection y, but it is unclear vide the basis for the bureau’s main work, the proces- when and for how long it was owned by y. Can you help?” sing of external inquiries. Auction houses, independent The bureau always responds to such inquiries, even when provenance researchers, relatives and/or successors of they are obscurely formulated. Account is taken of the fact victims of the Nazi regime, lawyers and journalists regular- that sometimes entire families were persecuted, many of ly ask the bureau for assistance in discovering the where- them murdered, and the few survivors (or their successors) abouts of artworks and the property situation of persons might not have had any precise recollections or relevant from the past. Requests for export approval, documents documents relating to the individual assets. The bureau’s 18 FIELD REPORT January 2021 – N°8 export database can check by artists and collectors, the chosen. It is to be hoped that long-term solutions (or more secured property file can be searched for all known cri- interns) can be found in future. teria, and the asset declarations in the State Archive can The many different types of research, tools and inquiries be examined. Ideally, this would be enough in this case make the staff of the bureau into experts with extensive to determine whether the painting was part of collec- knowledge of the different historical art collections and tion y. With external inquiries, however, the office of the perpetrators of Nazi confiscations. The knowledge acqui- Commission cannot conduct in-depth research into the red in this way is made available to the public in the form of provenance of individual items and can only provide contributions to the online Lexicon of Austrian Provenance assistance to the best of the bureau members’ ability. Research. These articles are written by all members of the If it should transpire that the object was owned by the Commission, the bureau staff and persons associated with Republic of Austria, the provenance researchers work- the Commission. I also had the possibility of writing artic- ing on behalf of the Commission would then be tasked les based on the results of my research. The online entries with investigating the case. are compiled in accordance with defined research crite- ria and verified in detail by the editorial team, in this way The provision of documentation for those affected or for providing a reliable source for provenance research and the the researcher community is not limited to archives. The publication of research results. At present the Lexicon ent- identification, transcription and evaluation of primary ries are only available in German, but an English version is sources is also called for and serves as a basis for the long- currently being prepared. standing and ongoing digitization of documents relevant to provenance research. A typical example is the inven- The electronic dossiers created for each operation are not tory list of the applied art objects stored at Kremsmüns- for publication. This useful documentation is intended so ter Abbey intended for the “Führermuseum” in Linz. The that the operations carried out in the Commission bureau typewritten list, compiled in the 1940s, contains 1,212 can be traced. They represent a classic (and sometimes items, which were recently digitized by me. tedious) administrative task which the members of the bureau team are permanently called upon to carry out. The processing of the following case by Anita Stelzl- Gallian with my collaboration would have been much sim- The Newsletter that you are reading here was compiled pler if all the documents had been digitized. To exami- in the Commission bureau by Pia Schölnberger, adminis- ne the contents of an art collection confiscated from the trative head of the Commission, with contributions from collector Bruno Jellinek, who was considered by the Nazi various committees and members of the Commission for regime to be a Jew, we compared several lists of the col- Provenance Research and ultimately published on the lection contents to check whether they matched. The items Commission’s website by Lisa Frank, who is responsible for appear in the original collection inventory, the list drawn up all the above-mentioned steps, including layout and design. after they were secured, various auction catalogues over a period of more than thirty years (sometimes with details This report gives only a meagre idea of the wide range of of the buyer) and documents from post-war restitution activities carried out in the Commission’s office. I hope to proceedings. Moreover, some of the collection items have have given a small insight into an institution that frequent- already been restituted. And as the lists were drawn up in ly remains invisible – unjustifiably so, because the work it a wide variety of circumstances, the names and the de- carries out is really important. I should like here to thank scriptions of the individual items are just as heterogeneous, the three members of the bureau – at once colleagues, again making it difficult to match the lists, which all exist supervisors and role models – for this highly instructive only on paper. The consolidation of all available sources in time. a single Excel file was a painstaking process but allows a di- rect comparison of documents, as well as digital searches Elisabeth Schroll studied museology in Berlin. She star- and updating of the results. ted the internship in Vienna in February 2020 but had to interrupt it after a month, returning to complete it from There are still further uncounted inventory, depot, trans- October, just before the second lockdown. She would port and inventory lists in the Federal Monuments Office like to continue her career in provenance research and is archive. It takes hours to transcribe each document into a particularly interested in researching the confiscation of searchable digital form with a view to simplifying work in cultural objects in the Soviet Occupation Zone and the future. But bureau staff do not have the time for this kind former German Democratic Republic. of work. Nor is it is too easy to decide which work should be transcribed first, regardless of the prioritization criteria 19 January 2021 – N°8 ADDENDUM The Jewish Digital Cultural Recovery Project (JDCRP)

The organised looting of cultural objects by the Nazis, their Project (JDCRP) was born with the goal of creating a allies, and collaborators happened not only in Germany comprehensive archival based presentation of all Jewish- but throughout almost all of Europe. The international owned cultural objects plundered by the Nazis and their dimension of the greatest art theft in history was im- allies from the time of the objects’ spoliation to the mediately perceived, and the need for a central registry present. The idea is not to replace the currently published has been acknowledged since the end of WWII. It was not and often excellent existing databases but to find new ways until the late 1990’s, however, that the idea of a central of improving and refining research and educational tools. database was concretely addressed. In the wake of the 1998 Washington Conference on Holocaust-Era Assets, The sense was that such an initiative needs to be run there were attempts to compile information, but most primarily in Europe, so in 2019 the JDCRP Stiftung was databases that various countries – Germany, Austria, established in Berlin, Germany, with an international team France, the Czech Republic, the Netherlands, the United and an initial network of international partners that it is States, and others – tried to create primarily reflected hoped will only continue growing. Amongst these partners the existing collections of their museums. The Confe- are the Archives Nationales of France; the Belgian State rence on Jewish Material Claims Against Germany (Claims Archives; the Bundesarchiv; the Centre allemand d’histoire Conference) and the World Jewish Restitution Organizati- de l’art, Paris; Christie’s; the CIVS of France; the Deutsches on (WJRO) recognized the need to go back to the original Zentrum Kulturgutverluste; the Getty Research Institute; archives of looting. They realized that in view of the great the Institut national d’histoire de l’art; the Ministère de la scattering of movable cultural objects and of the archives Culture et de la Communication of France (including the concerning them, international cooperation needed to be Archives de France and the Service interministériel des paramount. The focus was on the Einsatzstab Reichsleiter Archives de France); the United States National Archives Rosenberg (see https://www.errproject.org/), and the first and Records Administration; Sothebys: Fine Art Auctions object-level integrated database rooted in archives that and Private Sales; the United States Holocaust Memorial included information on what was taken, from whom, Museum; and the German Zentralinstitut für Kunstge- and the fate of the objects, if known, was the Database schichte. Also participating are the Fondation pour la of Art Objects at the Jeu de Paume (ERR Database) (see Mémoire de la Shoah, France; the Expertisecentrum https://www.errproject.org/jeudepaume/) that the Claims Restitutie, NIOD Instituut voor oorlogs-holocaust-en Conference produced in cooperation with the German genocidestudies; the Austrian Kommission für Provenienz- Federal Archives, the Diplomatic Archives of the French forschung, and others. Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Development, the United States National Archives and Records Adminis- An enterprise as ambitious as the JDCRP’s comprehensive tration, the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, database requires an underlying case study that will pro- and the Commission for Art Recovery (CAR). vide a coherent methodological framework with which to test and prove the project’s feasibility. On January 1, The success of that database led in 2016 to discussions 2020 the JDCRP launched its pilot project: The Fate of the organized by Wesley Fisher of the Claims Conference- Adolphe Schloss Collection, co-funded by the European WJRO and Agnes Peresztegi of CAR with the main govern- Union. Its purpose is to test and create a sustainable mo- ment agencies, archives and art history organizations of del database that captures and displays historical infor- France, the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, Austria, and mation about all Jewish-owned objects of art which were the United States. There was consensus that the experience looted and displaced by the National Socialists and their of the ERR Database, along with developments in techno- allies between 1933 and 1945. The JDCRP pilot project that logy, the greater opening of archives, and the knowledge concentrates on items that were part of the Schloss acquired through other databases and related provenance family’s collection includes all the phases of implemen- research projects could be forged to build something much tation, with a smaller volume and thematic scope, that larger with the participation of a greater international will allow for the JDCRP database to be designed and network. And so the Jewish Digital Cultural Recovery built based on the results. I ADDENDUM January 2021 – N°8

The Schloss collection consisted of 333 paintings of main- In consultation with its partner organizations and advisors, ly Dutch and Flemish old masters assembled by Adolphe the JDCRP will then move to the next phase, which will con- Schloss, a French-German internationally-renowned art sist of moving tens of thousands of items taken primarily connoisseur. This ultimately very European collection was in France, including many that did not go through the Jeu de looted in France in April 1943 and dispersed around the Paume but are currently being held in the ERR Database world in the ensuing years. The pilot project is exploring waiting to be transferred to the new general database, af- how art dealers, art galleries, auction houses, collectors ter which will begin the challenge of incorporating hund- and looting agencies, determined the fate – licit and/or reds of thousands of objects from a similar number of illicit – of the Schloss paintings. One-third of the collection archival documents from a variety of sources. The data- is still unaccounted for and circulating in the internatio- base will enable researchers, ministries of culture, museum nal art market. The pilot project is amassing thousands of curators, art dealers and auction houses – but also fami- documents and photographs from archives in France, lies and the generally curious – to investigate the fate and Germany, the Netherlands and the United States from history of looted cultural objects. which critical information will be extracted, processed and analyzed for inclusion into the model database. The If we have been able to adhere to our timeline, it has been relevant sections of historical databases developed by largely due to the wonderful cooperation of our various other research projects created using archival sources will partner organisations. The current global health crisis complement the pilot project’s database model. Experts could have theoretically ground our project to a halt. The from three advisory groups (archives, digital technology, travel bans enacted and the closing of archives were in- and provenance research/art history) provide critical in- deed problematic for our first phase, which consisted in put to the pilot project on how best to organize, analyze, the compiling and extraction of information from various and display the thousands of pieces of information. The repositories in numerous countries. Many of the archives pilot project will ensure that all documents, texts, and were extremely cooperative, sending us documentation images are fully searchable and can be queried so as to eli- and information during the quarantines enforced in many cit complex analytical results which can also be visualized. European countries. Our partner list went from a two- An additional outcome of the pilot project is the creation dimensional enumeration of organizations to a multi- of educational materials designed for both specialized and dimensional network of people who believe in the pro- lay audiences on a variety of topics surrounding the project ject. In our decentralised and globalized world, internati- such as: archival research, provenance research methods, onal cooperation cannot be sidelined. A project as large comparative and critical reading and analyzing of his- as the JDCRP is nothing if not international. The JDCRP torical documents, to name but a few. The pilot project will Stiftung looks forward to furthering cooperation by spon- also promote best practices on how to draft and present soring a number of related projects and by helping develop the history of objects from the time of their creation to the education in provenance research and education on the present. Holocaust generally through the history of the artworks and other cultural property that was plundered. Led by Marc Masurovsky, Academic Director, who was also responsible for the ERR Database, and by Avishag Ben- For further information, see http://jdcrp.org/. Yosef, Project Manager, the pilot project database relies on an event-based approach to tell the story of art objects as they move across time and space through the events and entities that shape their movement. Equal weight is assig- ned to the objects, the people and the events shaping their destiny. In an event-based database, the object-specific narrative is de-centered while the object becomes recon- textualized. The event-based approach, as opposed to the traditional object-based approach, innovates in its focus on the institutions and individuals who are involved direct- ly or indirectly with the fate of displaced art objects. The pilot project will conclude its initial tests, on schedule, as of the end of June 2021.

II Imprint

| The Newsletter is published by the Commission for Provenance Research, c/o Bundesdenkmalamt, Hofburg Batthyany-Stiege, A-1010 Vienna

| Editorial responsibility : Pia Schölnberger, Administrative director

| Copyright © 2021 by the Network Of European Restitution Committees On Nazi-Looted Art

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the publisher, except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical reviews and certain other noncommercial uses permitted by copyright law.

| Graphic design: Commission for Provenance Research, Lisa Frank - January 2021